Seyedeh-Sanam Ladi-Seyedian1,2, Lida Sharifi-Rad3,4,5, Hosein Alimadadi1,6, Behnam Nabavizadeh1, Navid Manouchehri1,2, Bahar Allahverdi1,6, Farzaneh Motamed1,6, Gholam-Hossein Fallahi1,6. 1. Pediatric Gastroenterology and Hepatology Research Center, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Children's Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, No. 62, Dr. Qarib St, Keshavarz Blvd, 14194 33151, Tehran, Iran. 2. Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation and Urotherapy Group (PFRUG), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Tehran, Iran. 3. Pediatric Gastroenterology and Hepatology Research Center, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Children's Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, No. 62, Dr. Qarib St, Keshavarz Blvd, 14194 33151, Tehran, Iran. l-sharifirad@farabi.tums.ac.ir. 4. Department of Physical Therapy, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Children's Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, No. 62, Dr. Qarib St, Keshavarz Blvd, 14194 33151, Tehran, Iran. l-sharifirad@farabi.tums.ac.ir. 5. Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation and Urotherapy Group (PFRUG), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Tehran, Iran. l-sharifirad@farabi.tums.ac.ir. 6. Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Center of Excellence, Children's Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We compared the effects of transcutaneous functional electrical stimulation (TFES) and biofeedback therapy with TFES alone in a cohort of children with functional non-retentive fecal incontinence (FNRFI). METHODS: This prospective, single-center randomized clinical trial was performed on 40 children with FNRFI. Patients were randomly allocated into two equal treatment groups. Group A (n = 20) underwent TFES + biofeedback therapy, and group B (n = 20) received TFES alone. All patients were assessed with a pediatric fecal incontinence (FI) score questionnaire, a visual pain score, and a bowel habit diary both before and at the end of treatment sessions and also at 6 months of follow-up. In addition, a FI quality-of-life (QoL) questionnaire was recorded for all patients before and 6 months after the treatment. RESULTS: FI significantly improved in 13/20 (65%) patients in group A and 11/20 (55%) patients in group B (P < 0.05). A significant reduction in FI score was seen in each group at the end of treatment sessions and maintained at 6 months of follow-up (P < 0.05). A significant improvement in FI-QoL scores was seen in both groups at 6 months of follow-up in which there was no significant difference in terms of FI-QoL scores improvement between both groups after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The use of electrical stimulation in combination with other treatment methods improves symptoms in patients with FNRFI who are refractory to conventional treatment.
BACKGROUND: We compared the effects of transcutaneous functional electrical stimulation (TFES) and biofeedback therapy with TFES alone in a cohort of children with functional non-retentive fecal incontinence (FNRFI). METHODS: This prospective, single-center randomized clinical trial was performed on 40 children with FNRFI. Patients were randomly allocated into two equal treatment groups. Group A (n = 20) underwent TFES + biofeedback therapy, and group B (n = 20) received TFES alone. All patients were assessed with a pediatric fecal incontinence (FI) score questionnaire, a visual pain score, and a bowel habit diary both before and at the end of treatment sessions and also at 6 months of follow-up. In addition, a FI quality-of-life (QoL) questionnaire was recorded for all patients before and 6 months after the treatment. RESULTS: FI significantly improved in 13/20 (65%) patients in group A and 11/20 (55%) patients in group B (P < 0.05). A significant reduction in FI score was seen in each group at the end of treatment sessions and maintained at 6 months of follow-up (P < 0.05). A significant improvement in FI-QoL scores was seen in both groups at 6 months of follow-up in which there was no significant difference in terms of FI-QoL scores improvement between both groups after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The use of electrical stimulation in combination with other treatment methods improves symptoms in patients with FNRFI who are refractory to conventional treatment.
Authors: Jason P Sulkowski; Kristine M Nacion; Katherine J Deans; Peter C Minneci; Marc A Levitt; Hayat M Mousa; Seth A Alpert; Steven Teich Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2015-03-26 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Hugo Alves de Sousa; Maria da Glória da Silva; Keyla de Paula Barbosa; Leonora Maciel de Souza Vianna; Yolanda Galindo Pacheco; José Roberto Pimenta de Godoy; Selma Aparecida Souza Kuckelhaus Journal: J Anat Date: 2017-05-26 Impact factor: 2.610
Authors: Melanie C C Clarke; Janet W Chase; Susie Gibb; Val J Robertson; Anthony Catto-Smith; John M Hutson; Bridget R Southwell Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: I J N Koppen; A von Gontard; J Chase; C S Cooper; C S Rittig; S B Bauer; Y Homsy; S S Yang; M A Benninga Journal: J Pediatr Urol Date: 2015-10-21 Impact factor: 1.830